Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-11-29

evidence. Held: Appellant did not pro-
duce the alleged bill of sale, claiming thst
it was lost. The evidence was conflict
ing, and it is evident that the Jury did
not believe the theory of the defense in
regard TO the bill of sale. The Jury
passed upon the credlbility of the wit
nesses, and we cannot say that the evil
dence does not support the verdict.
There was no reversible error. Will
son, j.
y Elk parte, E. J. Trader; appeal from
EastIand. In October, 1885, the relator
was indicted and the same presented in
the District court of K1rnes county. The
venue was changeds to Dewitt county in
the same month aDd wear above men,
toned. In April, 1887, the REALTORS
father fled an affidavit that his son was
lunstic, and should be placed under re-
straint. This was in Eastland county. A
jury ,ound him insane, and instead of
being sent to the asylum his relatives
executed bond, and he WAS duly turned
over to their care and custody under
provisions, Art. lis, R. S While in
their custody relstor, who is physician,
In September, 1887, the case pending
hSoIhSG 1Ii2sOA III Low 1gI COuuGJ was
called and, and relator falling 10 answer,
his bail bond was perfected and an
alias capiss fer his ARREST issued
The said writ was execu ed by his arrest
on September 20, 1887. Upon application
by his relatives, Hon. 7. H Conner, Judge
Forty-second Judicial district, (Eastland
being one of the counties of said district)
granted the applicants writ of habeas
corpus to have the legality of the arrest Of
Trader tested. On hearing, relator was
remanded to the custody of the sheriff of
Eastland County, instead of to the appli-
cants, his bondsmen. From that judg-
ment this appeal is taken. The Assistant
Attorney General moves to dismiss be-
cause Judge Conner had no jurisdiction of
the case. Held: Had Judge Conner re-
fused to grant the writ of habeas corpus
or refused to hear It upon the merits then
the II o ion would have been we'll taken.
This, however, is not the case. All dis
trict judges are autho lied to grant the
writ OF habeas corpus in felony cases.
Another well settled rule is that psrty's
right to the writ does not depend upon
the legality or illegality of his original
caption, but upon the legality or illegality
of his present detention. The Assistant
Attorney General insists that the habeas
corpus should have been made returrable
to the District court of Karnes county,
and that II said Conner had any authority
to issue the writ st all he had no authority
to hear the same. In support of this po-
sitiOn he recites Art. 1871, G, G. P. "After
Indictment fund the writ (hsbeas corpus
must be made returnable to the county
where the offense has been committed, on
account of which the applicant has been
indicted. He refers also to Art. 1873, G
G. P. Held: Under the facts of this case
we are Of opinion that Judge Conner had
authority to grant the writ, but that it
should have been made returnabie to the
District court of K.rnes county, in which
the offense was committed for
which relator stands indicted. 1t is or
dered that the judgment be set aside. and
that the writ be made returnable TO the
Judge oftaeT wenty-fourth Judicial distrit
On which district Karnes county is situs-
led) and that the sheriff of E.stland
county hold relator in his custody sub
ject to the orders of the said Judge of the
said Twenty-fourth Judicial district.
Whit, P.J.
Mcdaniel vs.. the State; sppeal from
Uvalde. Theft of goats. In this case
there being no statement of facts, or bills |
of exception, the indictment being suffi- |
cient and no error in the charge, the |
judgment will be allowed to stand. At
firmed. Wilson, j.
J. F. O'Connor & Co. vs.. J. n. Price; |
from Rockwell. Motion to dismiss. "The !
motion for new trial is overruled to which |
ruling defendants except and give notice |
in open court OF appeal to the Court of
Appeals OF the state of Texas" Attor-
neys for appellee urgently insist that this |
is not sufficient record of notice of ep-
peal, thst in fact appellants gave no no.
tice of said appeal. Held: There is sui !
fcient notice of appeal shown by the
record. Motion oyerruled. Wilson, J.